/m/rays

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

I remember him getting called up and I promptly forgot about him until about 10 days ago. I went looking at the stats and was impressed. I also didn't know how lanky he was - I watched some highlights on MLB-ATBAT that clued me into his frame. Not what I was expecting - don't know why. Maybe from watching Trout for 2 years.

Anyway, the only thing in the stats that are less than great are the BB rate (less than 10%) and the K/BB ratio. About 3 K's for every BB. But, that will improve, I'm sure. The overall K rate - about 25% will likely go down too. But those two things are things to keep an eye on as he develops. The walks should rise and the K's drop.

Having only seen a couple of highlights - what's his defensive reputation? How does he look out there? When does he play CF? I see only 7 games - is it to rest another player? Or just Maddon being Maddon and shuffling folks around?

Among rookies with at least 200 plate appearances since 2000, only Yasiel Puig, Albert Pujols and Ryan Braun have bettered Myers by a substantial amount, with Yasmani Grandal and Yoenis Cepedes just ahead of him. Myers, incidentally, is younger than any of them were, at the same point.

Among rookies with at least 200 plate appearances since 2000, only Yasiel Puig, Albert Pujols and Ryan Braun have bettered Myers by a substantial amount, with Yasmani Grandal and Yoenis Cepedes just ahead of him. Myers, incidentally, is younger than any of them were, at the same point.

Is that supposed to mean, among rookies in their first 200 plate appearances, because otherwise I'm not sure how Trout doesn't make such a list.

Stop it. The Royals had a big hole in the rotation and had only $13M a year to spend to find a career 107 ERA+ starter. Shields has been even better this year pitching against a soft schedule (95 innings vs. teams averaging 82, 92, 89, 86, 99, 98, 82 OPS+ in order of most innings, only 78 innings vs teams averaging 111, 108, 112, 102, 107, 105 OPS+).

But there was no place for Myers to play with Consummate Veteran locking down the right field job. Plus, in 3 years Wil is going to start to cost more than $500k per year, while the Royals have Shields locked up for $12M per the next two years.

I think you made your point the first dozen times you've re-litigated the Myers trade. Every mention of the 2013 Royals or Wil Myers or James Shields or Dayton, Ohio, or Frenchy from Grease does not require more of the same. We got it.

I think you made your point the first dozen times you've re-litigated the Myers trade. Every mention of the 2013 Royals or Wil Myers or James Shields or Dayton, Ohio, or Frenchy from Grease does not require more of the same. We got it.

Having only seen a couple of highlights - what's his defensive reputation? How does he look out there? When does he play CF? I see only 7 games - is it to rest another player? Or just Maddon being Maddon and shuffling folks around?

He was basically splitting CF with Fuld while Desmond Jennings was on the DL.

I'm not sure if he's done this for all of his HRs, but the dude likes to pimp.

He's pretty much done it on every home run I've seen from him so far. Good, I say. He's good and he knows he's good. I have no problem with that.

Switching my obsessive compulsive focus off the topic of how dumb that trade was for Royals, how the hell does Friedman get the balls to ask for Myers for Shields, let alone 3 more prospects while only tossing in Davis and Johnson?

Using FanGraphs measures for convenience and ignoring discounting for time out of laziness. Tampa Bay had the following assets to trade.

Shields - was worth about $15M a year over his previous 6 years, almost $19M/year his previous 2 years. You have him under contract for one more year at $9M, which is worth $6-$9M, and you can tender a $12M qualify offer to get a draft pick worth a few million, or if he accepts the QO another couple million in surplus value (he is only accepting if he's coming off a bad season). If you knew he'll sign that 1 year extension with option year at $12M/year, that adds a up to $14M more, but he's still only worth $15M-$25M in surplus value.

Wade Davis - had averaged a little over $4M in value the previous 4 years, and he's owed $4M a year over 2 years, so pretty close to zero value assuming that $2.5M buyout isn't owed, and negative if it is.

Elliot Johnson - had been positive WAR the last few years in limited playing time but is also arb eligible after this year. His actually value produces was about $1.7M a year, so maybe $1M in surplus value depending on how you use him.

So you have a package worth $15M-$25M, and in return you ask for

Wil Shields - Best available minor league hitter and top prospect still very young. He has 3 years at MLB minimum and 3 years of salary arbitration remaining, then you can offer the 1 year qualifying contract to net a decent prospect back if you haven't extended him. If he's an average MLB player during that span, he's worth about $10M a year, or $60M total minus his salaries. First 3 years are 1.5M total, and assuming his arb awards are 40%/60%/80% of his value, he'd make about $20M total, making his net value $40M.

Jake Odorizzi - Decent starting pitching prospect, ranked 42nd on MLB.com list, I'm assuming that was his off-season rank. If he just becomes Wade Davis before getting too expensive for his value in arbitration and you cut him after 5 years, that's worth $24M in value minus around $6M in pay for about $18M.

Leonard and Montgomery are lottery tickets, so that has to be worth a few millions more.

So how the hell does Friedman ask for more $60M in assets in return for assets he has that at most are worth $25M? I say more than, because it's very likely he asked for more than he got, that's how negotiations go, Friedman he has to give up something so Moore feels that he got a good deal. Friedman probably started off proposing KC also sending another couple prospects or taking on another overpaid player (this probably, as a perfect hot button for Moore to focus on removing).

I could never start above $60M if I knew my assets were worth $25M. I probably start off asking for $40M, hoping to get $35M, and afraid to ask for more in case I get laughed out of the room and Moore stops taking my calls. I just suck at negotiations apparently.

The point in #17 addresses my reaction at the time of the trade. I was shocked that Friedman would have the balls to turn down a Myers for Shields straight up offer, instead asking to also shed Davis's contract (which has some value probably to Moore but presumably the Rays were just happy to get rid of the salary commitment) AND also get Odorizzi and a couple of lottery tickets (Montgomery a former top prospect too).

So how the hell does Friedman ask for more $60M in assets in return for assets he has that at most are worth $25M? I say more than, because it's very likely he asked for more than he got, that's how negotiations go

Yea, there were reports the Rays "weren't all that interested in Myers" at the time. Friedman is a sly fox.

I guess that's why there are some reports of GM's asking for a ton and "getting laughed at". You never know when you're ridiculous offer will be accepted. "Uh...how bout Carlos Santana for Casey Blake" (snicker) "Oh, what? You'll take it? Thanks Ned!"

I guess that's why there are some reports of GM's asking for a ton and "getting laughed at". You never know when you're ridiculous offer will be accepted. "Uh...how bout Carlos Santana for Casey Blake" (snicker) "Oh, what? You'll take it? Thanks Ned!"

It's an interesting trade-off. You have to weigh the potential for an occasional robbery, vs. the possibility of alienating teams so they won't deal with you, or ask the moon right back in return.

If I were a GM, I'd probably save my unreasonable requests for guys I thought weren't very good, and would be out of a job soon. Minimize the duration of any "black-balling".

While I'm sure a certain amount of personality enters into GMs making transactions, how damaging is it really to make an offer that you think is outrageous (and run the risk of your counter-part GM agreeing with you on that)?

I can understand a GM having an inclination towards approaching a different guy in future trades if you've made a crazy offer in the past. But it's not like he's not going to pursue a trade if you've got a player he likes, or if he's got a piece that fits your needs. He's not going to be screening his calls to ignore you.

Especially if it's a counter-offer, I see no reason not to ask for the moon, and I'm sure no GM would be insulted.

If it happens like this:

KC: We'll give you Myers for Shields.
TB: Hmm...nah, you'll have to sweeten the deal a bit, with X, Y and Z.

I would think a reasonable GM would think..."ok, he's telling me he's not really interested in trading Shields, let's explore other options". One reason you don't flat out say you're not interested in trading Shields is that there are one or two GMs who actually take you up on the offer.

I was shocked that Friedman would have the balls to turn down a Myers for Shields straight up offer, instead asking to also shed Davis's contract (which has some value probably to Moore but presumably the Rays were just happy to get rid of the salary commitment) AND also get Odorizzi and a couple of lottery tickets (Montgomery a former top prospect too).

Guys, for all we know the negotiations began with Wade Davis for Jake Odorizzi. They don't necessarily just start with the biggest names and then tack on extras until things even out.

Also, I reject KT's accounting which exclusively looks at surplus value. A $15 million player that plays like a $15 million player is not worthless. In fact I find the whole scheme so academic as to be useless. Was Mike Trout really worth $40 million this year? Not to mention the very shaky Fangraphs "value" amounts. I thought we as a community had agreed to ignore those?

Guys, for all we know the negotiations began with Wade Davis for Jake Odorizzi. They don't necessarily just start with the biggest names and then tack on extras until things even out.

This is a good point. But it seems unlikely anyone called for Davis. But point taken.

Also, I reject KT's accounting which exclusively looks at surplus value. A $15 million player that plays like a $15 million player is not worthless. In fact I find the whole scheme so academic as to be useless. Was Mike Trout really worth $40 million this year? Not to mention the very shaky Fangraphs "value" amounts. I thought we as a community had agreed to ignore those?

Well I don't think anyone thinks they are spot on - but those values are at least a ballpark figure. And, KT's point still stands: Myers was a much more valuable commodity to a team like KC than Shields would be. Not necessarily in 2013, but over the next six years? Come on.

[quoteA $15 million player that plays like a $15 million player is not worthless.]

I can't understand this. can you clarify?

if you don't like fangraphs, you can use BBRef WAR and do the dollar calculations by hand, but it's not going to change the numbers much.

if you don't like trying to quantify player salary adjusted values and by converting values to dollars, that's pretty much the only way to do it. even GMs who don't understand WAR do mental math that approximates it.

[quoteA $15 million player that plays like a $15 million player is not worthless.]

I can't understand this. can you clarify?

Really, you don't get that? In your accounting scheme a player merely earns his salary has added zero value to his team. That is, if Kyle Lohse is paid $10 million, and he is "worth" $10 million, he has provided exactly as much value to his team as you and I have.

That whole $/Win framework is based on the highly distorted free agent market (in which only a fraction of players are available) - a market in which players are rarely expected, even by the GMs that sign them, to produce much surplus value - I really hate using it as a common baseline for both rookies and veterans.

Really, you don't get that? In your accounting scheme a player merely earns his salary has added zero value to his team. That is, if Kyle Lohse is paid $10 million, and he is "worth" $10 million, he has provided exactly as much value to his team as you and I have.

No, he's provided $10M in value. He cost $10M which tells us only we likely could have bought those wins elsewhere for a similar price. Obviously, there are limits to this, pitchers similar to Lohse's value/ability aren't always available on the market, or in trade. But some pitchers and position players are always available at roughly this rate per win, so the money can usually be spent somewhere to produce similar numbers of wins even if it has to be spent on another position, two pitchers or players, or packaged with more money or talent to get someone better than Lohse.

And I don't know about you, but I'm nowheres near replacement level.

That whole $/Win framework is based on the highly distorted free agent market (in which only a fraction of players are available) - a market in which players are rarely expected, even by the GMs that sign them, to produce much surplus value - I really hate using it as a common baseline for both rookies and veterans.

This analysis isn't about "producing surplus value". It's about how much value each team got, and what they paid to get it. If the Yankees want to run a $350M payroll, trade all their minor leaguers for expensive vets so they can pay $10M per WAR, they'll still build a competitive team.

Dayton Moore knew how expensive each of the players in this deal were over their control years, knew his payroll was increasing $29M over 2 years with this deal. The question is, what did he expect to get out of it?

More wins, now, that's for sure. Somewhere in Moore's big square head a monkey on an abacus was working overtime till the twine smoked, and that monkey told Dayton that Shields+ Davis would at a minimum add more wins than Myers+Odorizzi+ spending $29M elsewhere over the next 2 years. Because if cost and wins wash for both options, even the monkey knows the 2015-2018 cheap control years for Myers/Odorizzi have a ton of value.

Moore should be able to buy close to 3 wins with $15M a year in free agency/trades. That clearly means he thought that Shields/Davis were going to add significantly more than 3 wins a year over what Myers/Odorizzi would. If he expected Myers/Odorizzi to add 2 wins, then he thought Shields/Davis were worth at least 6 wins a year. He either undervalued Myers, or overvalued Shields/Davis, or both to produce a value gap so large that $15M a year couldn't bridge it. Even with Myers replacing a guy worth -2.3 Wins last year.

It's about wins and what resources you have to maximize them. Whether you like the framework or not, propose a better solution. Daytons was clearly one of the worst possible.